explain_clause

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided; description only states it explains without disclosing behavioral traits like read-only, authentication needs, or side effects. Major gap given annotation absence.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One sentence, concise and front-loaded with main action. However, lacks necessary detail, making it efficient but incomplete.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema or return format described; parameter semantics missing; description incomplete for agent to reliably invoke despite simple tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Single parameter 'source' has no description in schema (0% coverage) and tool description does not define its meaning or format, leaving agent unsure what to provide.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it explains clauses of a Liminate Agreement in plain English, listing specific aspects covered (verb, condition, rationale, temporal window, unless-exception). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like draft_agreement or validate_agreement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implicitly suggests use when clause explanation is needed, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or comparison with alternatives. Lack of when-not or alternative references reduces clarity.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.